Abstract
Objectives To assess the impact of the December 2018 approval of home administration of misoprostol in England on access to medical abortion.
Design Time series analysis
Setting British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), independent-sector abortion provider in England
Participants 145,529 abortions carried out by BPAS across England between 2018 and 2019.
Intervention Approval of home administration of misoprostol in early medical abortions (EMA) in December 2018
Main outcome measure Gestational age at abortion and EMAs as a proportion of all abortions. The analysis was stratified by key sociodemographic characteristics to assess differential impacts of the approval
Results 99,008 abortions took place in the period before the approval or during its implementation phase (January 2018 – June 2019) and 46,521 took place after (July 2019 – Dec 2019). Compared to if former trends had continued, the actual proportion of EMAs was 4.2% higher in December 2019 and the mean gestational age 3.4 days lower.
Conclusion Following the approval of home use of misoprostol, we saw an acceleration in the trends towards increasing proportion of all abortions that were EMAs and decreasing gestational age at abortion, especially in more deprived areas of England. Some inequities remain across race/ethnicity groups that require further investigation. Policymakers should take the positive results of this study into consideration when reviewing rules for home management of medical abortions, including with home use of mifepristone.
What is already known on this topic In 2018 in England, a woman’s “home” was designated as a class of place where misoprostol could be used to induce abortion up to 10 weeks’ gestation following administration of mifepristone in a medical facility. This model of abortion care has been shown in numerous international studies to be highly effective, safe, and preferred by women over in-clinic use. Existing data anticipated positive clinical and acceptability outcomes with implementation of home use, but whether or how the change would impact access particularly in relation to barriers such as area-level deprivation, race/ethnicity, and disability was uncertain.
What this study adds The approval of home use of misoprostol as part of a medical abortion regimen in England was associated with material and equitable improvements in abortion access as evidenced by a higher proportion of medical abortions provided, lower gestational age at treatment, and higher odds of having a medical abortion across all racial/ethnic groups and socioeconomic groups. Pre-approval trends toward greater uptake of medical abortion and declining gestational age were accelerated post-approval and were greatest in the most deprived quintiles but not across all racial/ethnic groups.
Patient and Public Involvement Statement This study was a quantitative data analysis of existing clinical data and patients were not directly involved in the research.
Authors’ note on terminology The authors would like to note that abortions are experienced not only by cis-women, but also by trans, non-binary and intersex people, who should be recognised and treated as equal recipients of abortion care. The term ‘women’ will be used in this project for simplicity and in acknowledgment of the fact that the majority of the patients identify as women.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This project approved by the BPAS Research and Ethics Committee (11/06/2020) and by the LSHTM MSc Research Ethics Committee (14/07/2020). All the pre-existing data was delivered in a fully anonymised format and stored on an encrypted drive.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵* Joint first author, guarantor
The Corresponding Author has the right to grant on behalf of all authors and does grant on behalf of all authors, an exclusive licence on a worldwide basis to the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd to permit this article (if accepted) to be published in BMJ editions and any other BMJPGL products and sublicences such use and exploit all subsidiary rights, as set out in our licence.
The lead authors affirm that this manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.
Ethical approvals This project approved by the BPAS Research and Ethics Committee (11/06/2020) and by the LSHTM MSc Research Ethics Committee (14/07/2020). All the pre-existing data was delivered in a fully anonymised format and stored on an encrypted drive.
Funding There was no allocated funding for this study.
Data Availability
Data reported in this analysis is not available as it is subject to an ethical permission restricted to the authors of the manuscript
